4 c\  YYl  - 

Pac.^.  I®, 

n ' 


r 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  DEMOCRATIC 
GOVERNMENT  IN  THE  PHILIP- 
PINES—ITS  SALIENT 
ASPECTS 


LECTURE  DELIVERED  BY  THE  HON.  SERGIO  OSMENA. 
PRESIDENT  PRO  TEMPORE  OF  THE  PHILIPPINE 
SENATE  AND  SPECIAL  REPRESENTATIVE  OF 
THE  PHILIPPINE  LEGISLATURE.  BE- 
FORE THE  UNIVERSITY  OF 
MICHIGAN.  ANN  ARBOR. 

DECEMBER  14.  1925 


PHILIPPINE  PRESS  BUREAU 
905  Investment  Building 
Washington,  D.  C. 


THE  PROBLEM  OF  DEMOCRATIC  GOV- 
ERNMENT IN  THE  PHILIPPINES: 

ITS  SALIENT  ASPECTS 


(Lecture  delivered  by  the  Hon.  Sergio  Osmena,  president  pro  tempore 
of  the  Philippine  Senate,  and  .special  representative  of  the 
Philippine  Legislature,  before  the  University  of 
Michigan,  Ann  Arbor,  December  14,  1925.) 


The  continued  occupation  of  the  Philippines  by  the  United  States  after 
the  termination  of  the  -war  with  Spain  could  not  be  easily  justified  before 
the  conscience  of  this  great  Republic.  Dedicated  to  liberty  from  the  very 
first  moments  of  its  existence  it  has  consecrated  its  best  efforts  to  the 
upholding  of  the  right  of  nations  to  trace  out  for  themselves  their  own 
destiny.  To  vindicate  this  right  and  in  pursuance  of  humanitarian  pur- 
poses war  was  declared,  a war  which  placed  Cuban  territory  under  the 
protection  of  the  Stars  and  Stripes.  And  because  America  emerged  tri- 
umphant Cuba  obtained  her  independence. 

When  on  the  signing  of  the  treaty  of  peace  which  disposed  of  not  only 
the  fate  of  Cuba,  but  also  that  of  other  Spanish  possessions,  America  de- 
cided to  remain  in  the  Philippines,  the  moral  justification  which  she  gave 
to  the  world  was  the  desire  to  liberate  the  Filipinos  from  misgovemment 
and  oppression,  and  to  secure  to  them  the  privileges  of  self-government. 
According  to  the  testimony  of  Doctor  Schurman,  the  chairman  of  the  first 
commission  sent  to  the  Philippines,  the  supreme  consideration  which  moved 
President  McKinley,  and  which  so  touched  the  fibers  of  sentiment  of  Amer- 
ican hearts  as  to  induce  them  to  give  active  support  to  his  administration 
was  not  selfish  but  humanitarian:  “*  * * it  was  not  the  vanity  of 

self-aggrandizement;  it  was  not  the  greed  of  power  and  dominion;  no,  no; 
not  these,  but  altruism,  caring  for  the  happiness  of  others,  philanthropy 
relieving  the  Filipinos  of  oppression  and  conferring  on  them  the  blessings 
of  liberty.” 1 

The  immediate  problem  which  the  United  States  had  to  face  when  she 
decided  to  remain  in  the  Islands  was  the  establishment  of  a democratic 
government  in  which  the  Filipinos  would  have  the  greatest  participation 
possible.  As  the  Schurman  Commission  stated  in  a proclamation,  “The 
most  ample  liberty  of  self-government  will  be  granted  to  the  Filipino  peo- 
ple which  is  reconcilable  with  the  maintenance  of  a wise,  just,  stable,  ef- 
fective, and  economical  administration  of  public  affairs  and  compatible  with 
the  sovereign  and  international  rights  and  obligations  of  the  United 
States.”  1 Using  the  words  of  the  statesman  mainly  responsible  for  Amer- 
ican occupation  of  our  country,  the  authority  of  the  United  States  has  been 

1 J.  G.  Schurman,  “Philippine  Affairs.’’ 

7 Proclamation  of  April  4,  1899,  Report  of  the  Phil.  Commission  (1900),  Vol.  1. 

s 


4 


established  in  the  Philippines  “not  to  exploit  but  to  develop,  to  civilize,  to 
educate,  to  train  in  the  science  of  self-government.” *  1 The  American  people 
were  to  be  the  bearers  “of  the  richest  blessings  of  a liberating  rather  than 
a conquering  nation,”  and  it  was  their  purpose  “to  make  them  [the  Filipino 
people]  whom  Providence  has  brought  within  our  jurisdiction  feel  that  it 
is  their  liberty  and  not  our  power,  their  welfare  and  not  our  gain  we  are 
seeking  to  enhance.” 2 These  declarations  were  not  only  confirmed  but 
strengthened  by  the  successors  of  President  McKinley  and,  above  all,  by 
the  congressional  enactment  which  gave  to  the  Filipinos  an  autonomous 
government  as  preliminary  to  complete  independence. 

Despite  these  declarations  of  altruistic  purposes,  the  establishment  of 
the  new  regime  could  not  be  effected  without  serious  resistance.  In  the 
midst  of  war  the  government  necessarily  had  to  be  of  a military  character, 
in  which  executive,  legislative,  and  judicial  powers  were  concentrated  in 
one  head,  although  the  exercise  of  his  functions  could,  if  he  so  desired,  be 
delegated  to  different  persons  or  entities.  It  is  to  the  credit  of  the  Amer- 
ican military  commanders  of  the  time  that  it  is  possible  to  say  of  them 
that  they  considered  extremely  dangerous  a government  of  concentrated 
powers  without  the  intervention  of  the  people  and  that  they  established, 
even  in  the  midst  of  armed  resistance,  the  foundations  of  civil  institutions. 
Filipinos  were  called  upon  to  make  recommendations  regarding  a system 
of  municipal  government  which  would  be  popular  and  eminently  democratic. 
This  system  was  immediately  instituted  in  the  towns  occupied  by  American 
military  forces.  In  the  judicial  branch,  in  which  many  Filipinos  had  dis- 
tinguished themselves  during  Spanish  rule,  native  judges  and  magistrates 
were  appointed.  The  best  known  native  jurist  was  placed  at  the  head  of 
our  highest  tribunal  of  justice.  The  public  schools,  the  basis  of  order  and 
progress,  also  received  immediate  attention.  The  Filipinos  will  never  for- 
get the  inspiring  spectacle  of  American  soldiers  leaving  their  guns  and,  as 
emissaries  of  peace  and  good  will,  with  book  in  hand,  repairing  to  the  public 
schools  to  teach  Filipino  children  the  principles  of  free  citizenship.  Thus, 
in  the  earliest  period  of  the  military  regime,  when  it  would  have  been  easy 
to  find  legalistic  grounds  for  governing  the  Filipinos  by  pure  force,  there 
was  established,  as  far  as  possible,  the  milder  sway  of  civil  government. 
Instead  of  excluding  the  natives  from  the  government,  against  which  the 
people  were  still  in  open  rebellion,  the  representatives  of  the  United  States 
considered  it  a duty  to  enlist  their  cooperation  and  to  listen  to  their  counsel. 

This  cooperation  became  more  manifest  after  the  inauguration  of  civil 
government  in  July,  1901.  Native  resistance  having  been  weakened  by 
the  fall  of  the  government  of  the  Philippine  Republic,  and  the  surrender 
of  many  native  military  chieftains,  President  McKinley  sent  to  the  Philip- 
pines a second  commission  under  the  presidency  of  Mr.  Taft  to  exercise 
civil  powers — powers  exercised  up  to  then  by  the  military  commander — 
and  to  offer  to  the  Filipino  people  a practical  illustration  of  the  kind  of 
government  they  would  have  under  American  sovereignty  once  peace  and 
tranquility  had  been  secured.  In  his  instructions  to  this  commission  Presi- 
dent McKinley  expressly  prescribed,  with  reference  to  popular  participa- 
tion in  the  government,  “that  in  all  cases  the  municipal  officers  who  ad- 
minister the  local  affairs  are  to  be  selected  by  the  people,  and  that  when- 


1 President  McKinley’s  Message  to  Congress.  1899. 

1 Instructions  to  the  first  Philippine  Commission,  Jan.  20.  1899. 


6 


ever  officers  of  more  extended  jurisdiction  are  to  be  selected  in  any  way 
natives  of  the  Philippine  Islands  are  to  be  preferred,  and  if  they  can 
be  found  competent  and  willing  to  perform  the  duties  they  are  to  receive 
the  offices  in  preference  to  others.”  1 

Following  these  instructions,  the  Taft  Commission  organized  the  Philip- 
pine Government  by  the  enactment  of  a municipal  code  in  which  local 
autonomy  was  granted  to  the  natives,  and  of  a provincial  code  by  which 
considerable  popular  participation  was  granted  in  the  government  of  the 
provinces;  by  the  organization  of  a civil  service  in  which,  under  equal  cir- 
cumstances, the  natives,  it  was  declared,  would  be  given  preference  over 
Americans;  by  the  establishment  of  different  offices  charged  with  govern- 
mental activities,  such  as  the  constabulary,  public  works,  sanitation,  and 
the  insular  treasury;  and,  finally,  by  the  creation  of  four  executive  de- 
partments. In  the  establishment  of  local  governments  the  commission 
followed,  as  far  as  possible,  the  same  administrative  divisions  which  had 
been  in  existence  since  ancient  times.  The  “Barangay,”  a primary  unit 
of  local  government  which  antedated  the  Spanish  conquest  and  which  the 
Spaniards  reoognized,  was  in  essence  equally  respected. 

One  year  after  the  Taft  Commission  had  entered  upon  the  exercise  of 
its  legislative  labors,  three  Filipinos  of  the  conservative  group  were  ap- 
pointed to  its  membership  in  order  to  give  representation  to  the  natives. 
It  was  not  then  possible  to  appoint  members  of  the  radical  elements  be- 
cause these  were  either  still  in  open  rebellion  or  unwilling  to  accept  office. 
But  the  first  three  Filipinos  in  the  commission  undoubtedly  served  public 
interest  to  the  best  of  their  ability  under  those  circumstances  and  acted 
as  advisers  of  the  Governor  General  and  the  commission  in  many  adminis- 
trative matters  and  especially  those  referring  to  the  appointment  of 
Filipinos  to  governmental  positions. 

The  government  established  at  that  time,  although  inspired  by  North 
American  constitutional  principles,  was  not  strictly  the  American  type  in 
the  sense  that  it  was  an  exact  copy  of  the  Federal  Government  or  of  the 
government  of  any  of  the  States  in  the  Union.  For  example,  in  the  Fed- 
eral Government  or  in  that  of  the  States  the  Chief  Executive  as  well  as 
the  members  of  the  legislature  are  elected  by  the  people,  while  in  the 
Philippine  Government  of  that  period  such  officials  were  appointed  by  the 
President  of  the  United  States.  In  the  Federal  Government  and  in  that  of 
the  States  members  of  the  legislature  do  not  occupy  executive  positions, 
while  in  the  Philippines  not  only  was  that  not  the  case  but  there  was  ex- 
press arrangement  that  the  civil  governor,  who  was  the  chief  executive, 
and  the  departmental  secretaries  who  formed  his  cabinet  were  to  be  at  the 
same  time  president  and  members  of  the  legislative  commission.  This 
system,  recommended  by  the  Schurman  Commission,  was  similar  to  that 
adopted  by  Congress  for  organization  of  the  successive  Territories  of 
the  Union.  Its  immediate  model  was  the  legislation  enacted  for  Louisiana 
at  the  time  of  Jefferson.  Its  more  remote  source  was  the  colonial  type 
which  existed  previous  to  the  Revolution.  It  is  well  to  note  the  fact  that 
in  the  government  headed  by  Mr.  Taft,  which  President  Roosevelt  char- 
acterized in  a message  to  Congress  as  a constitutional  government,  what 
the  defenders  of  the  presidential  system  termed  the  complete  separation 
of  powers  did  not  exist,  as  it  did  not  in  the  form  of  government  first  ap- 


1 Instructions  to  the  Second  Philippine  Commission,  April  7,  1900. 


6 


plied  to  American  Continental  Territories  or  during  the  colonial  period. 
Neither  did  the  separation  of  powers  obtain  in  the  English  Government 
at  the  time  of  Blackstone,  whose  works  influenced  to  no  small  degree  the 
fathers  of  the  American  Constitution.  And  the  experience  of  this  country 
for  a century  and  a half  has  shown  the  necessity  of  discovering  methods 
for  securing  cooperation  between  the  executive  and  legislative  branches 
of  the  Government.  Leaving  aside  the  question  whether  or  not  the  sepa- 
ration of  powers  is  really  characteristic  of  the  American  constitutional 
system,  it  is  certain  that  it  was  never  applied  in  the  Philippines  as  it  has 
been  in  the  United  States. 

The  truth  is  that  it  was  never  thought  of  the  United  States  in  establish- 
ing her  authority  over  the  Philippines  to  Americanize  the  Filipino  people 
or  their  institutions.  With  all  their  defects,  and  there  is  no  civilization  or 
human  institution  without  them,  there  existed  in  the  Philippines  on  the 
arrival  of  the  Americans  a Christian  and  progressive  civilization.  Her 
inhabitants  had  been  accustomed  for  centuries  to  a government  of  law 
and  order.  Americans  did  not  propose  to  destroy  that  civilization,  but  to 
preserve  and  improve  it.  Schurman,  the  precursor  of  civil  government, 
the  American  who  made  a thorough  investigation  of  the  islands  and  on 
whose  reports  America’s  policy  was  based  in  large  part,  rejected  as  im- 
possible the  idea  of  Americanizing  them.1  The  primordial  thought  was  to 
organize  a native  government  which  would  not  necessarily  be  a copy  of 
the  American  constitutional  system.  Let  us  recall  what  President  McKinley 
said  to  the  second  commission.  “In  all  the  forms  of  government,  in  the 
administrative  provisions  which  they  are  authorized  to  prescribe,  the  com- 
mission should  bear  in  mind  that  the  government  which  they  are  estab- 
lishing is  designed  not  for  our  satisfaction  or  for  the  expression  of  our 
theoretical  views,  but  for  the  happiness,  peace,  and  prosperity  of  the  people 
of  the  Philippine  Islands,  and  the  measures  adopted  should  be  made  to 
conform  to  their  customs,  their  habits,  and  even  their  prejudices  to  the 
fullest  extent  consistent  with  the  accomplishment  of  the  indispensable 
requisites  of  just  and  effective  government.”1 

In  the  discharge  of  his  official  duties,  as  well  as  in  his  dealings  with  the 
Filipinos,  Governor  Taft,  and  the  same  may  be  said  of  those  who  suc- 
ceeded him  in  office,  insisted  emphatically  that  the  government  which  had 
been  established  was  for  the  benefit  of  the  P’ilipinos,  and  that  as  they  dem- 
onstrated ability  to  exercise  political  power  they  would  be  given  increasing 
participation  in  the  government. 

The  famous  doctrine,  “The  Philippines  are  for  the  Filipinos,”  which 
characterized  the  Taft  administration,  was  insistently  and  openly  pro- 
claimed in  spite  of  the  opposition  of  the  great  majority  of  Americans  in 
the  Philippines.  These,  quite  a number  of  whom  had  come  with  the  ex- 
peditionary troops,  asked  for  a “strong”  government,  which  would  aim 
principally  at  the  prosperity  of  American  interests  in  the  Philippines. 
Taft  disregarded  the  severe  criticisms  of  his  fellow  countrymen  and  con- 
tinued his  work  with  vigor,  defending  his  doctrine,  in  the  realization  of 
which,  according  to  him,  “was  involved  the  honor  of  the  United  States.”  * 

The  government  by  the  Commission  continued  until  October,  1907,  the 
date  of  the  inauguration  of  the  first  elective  national  assembly  under 

1 J.  G.  Schurman,  ‘‘Philippine  Affairs.” 

’ Instructions  to  the  Becond  Philippine  Commission,  April  7,  1900. 

' W.  H.  Taft.  ‘‘The  Duty  of  Americans  in  the  Philippines,”  December,  1903. 


7 


American  rule,  and  from  that  time  the  national  lawmaking  body  was  com- 
posed of  two  chambers,  the  Commission  or  the  upper  house,  and  the  As- 
sembly or  the  lower  house.  The  establishment  of  the  Assembly  was  a 
logical  and  decisive  step  in  the  development  of  popular  government.  Until 
then  the  Filipino  people  did  not  have  real  representation  in  the  Legisla- 
ture, because  although  there  were  three  Filipinos  in  the  Commission,  these 
did  not  hold  office  by  the  suffrage  of  the  people,  but  by  appointment  from 
the  authorities  in  Washington.  Thereafter  there  was  participation  by  the 
representatives  of  the  people  in  the  preparation  and  approval  of  the  laws, 
and  those  representatives  constituted  in  law  a power  equal  to  the  Com- 
mission, at  least  in  the  affairs  concerning  the  Christian  population  of  the 
islands. 

The  concession  of  a legislative  assembly  was  not  brought  about  with- 
out effort.  During  and  after  the  American-Philippine  conflict  many  ac- 
cusations were  launched  against  the  leaders  of  the  Philippine  Republic 
and  against  the  Filipino  people.  None  had  more  serious  results  than  that 
which  was  repeated  for  years  against  the  national  unity  of  the  Filipino 
people.  This  accusation  which  never  had  any  foundation  in  fact  created 
a profound  impression  among  American  governmental  authorities  and  made 
congressional  approval  of  the  idea  of  an  elective  assembly  difficult  to  ob- 
tain. But  finally,  there  was  incorporated  in  the  law  through  the  efforts  of 
Representative  Cooper,  chairman  of  the  Committee  on  Insular  Affairs  of 
the  House  of  Representatives,  the  provision  recommended  by  Mr.  Taft. 
The  Assembly  was  established  during  the  administration  of  President 
Roosevelt,  who  attached  great  importance  to  this  step.  These  were  his 
words:  “We  are  endeavoring  to  develop  the  natives  themselves  so  that 
they  shall  take  an  ever-increasing  share  in  the  Government  and  as  far 
as  is  prudent  we  are  already  admitting  their  representatives  to  a govern- 
mental equality  with  our  own.  If  they  show  that  they  are  capable  of 
taking  a sane  and  efficient  part  in  the  actual  work  of  the  Government, 
they  can  rest  assured  that  a full  and  increasing  measure  of  recognition 
will  be  given  them.’'1 

The  Assembly  was  organized  in  40  minutes.  Although  it  adopted  sub- 
stantially the  rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Fifty-ninth 
Congress,  the  changes  introduced  from  the  very  beginning  foreshadowed 
some  of  its  tendencies.  There  was  then  being  formed  in  the  United  States 
that  opposition  which  later  produced  an  uprising  against  the  system  that 
permitted  the  Speaker  to  exercise  control  over  the  affairs  of  the  House 
through  the  chairmanship  of  the  Committee  on  Rules,  which  he  occupied. 
From  the  first  day  of  the  Philippine  Assembly  the  Speaker  never  presided 
over  the  Rules  Committee.  On  the  contrary,  the  conduct  of  business  was 
given  to  a committee  under  the  chairmanship  of  another  member  of  the 
Assembly. 

In  the  rules  of  the  House  of  Representatives  of  the  Fifty-ninth  Con- 
gress there  were  various  committees  which  dealt  with  appropriations  and 
one  Committee  on  Ways  and  Means.  In  the  rules  of  the  Philippine  As- 
sembly provision  was  made  for  one  appropriations  committee  composed 
of  25  members,  most  of  whom  were  chairmen  of  other  committees.  The 
work  of  the  Philippine  Assembly  during  its  inaugural  session  was  received 


Message  of  President  Roosevelt  to  Congress,  December  6,  1904. 


8 


by  the  American  Government  with  satisfaction.  The  Governor  General 
congratulated  the  legislature  in  the  following  terms: 

“The  work  which  has  been  done  by  the  Philippine  Assembly  at  its 
inaugural,  first,  and  special  sessions,  of  the  first  legislature  has  exceeded 
all  expectations,  and  it  must  be  eminently  gratifying  to  the  Assembly  and 
the  people  whom  they  represent  that  there  has  been  such  a happy  realiza- 
tion of  all  that  has  been  expected  of  them,  those  constituting  the  first 
representative  legislative  body  that  has  ever  existed  in  the  Philippines.”  1 

Mr.  Taft,  then  Secretary  of  War,  who  was  present  at  the  inauguration 
of  the  Assembly,  returned  to  the  United  States  with  the  report  (Special 
Report  to  the  President  of  the  United  States)  that  that  body  was  func- 
tioning normally.  President  Roosevelt  transmitted  to  Congress  this  re- 
port of  the  Secretary  of  War  in  which  a thorough  review  was  made  of 
conditions  in  the  Philippines  and  the  policy  followed  by  the  United  States. 
In  a subsequent  message  to  that  body,  he  expressed  himself  in  this  fashion: 
“Hitherto  this  Philippine  Legislature  has  acted  with  moderation  and  self- 
restraint  * * * the  Filipino  people  with  their  officials  are  therefore 

making  real  steps  in  the  direction  of  self-government.  I hope  and  believe 
that  those  steps  mark  the  beginning  of  a course  which  will  continue  until 
the  Filipinos  become  fit  to  decide  for  themselves  whether  they  desire  to 
be  an  independent  nation.”  1 

Contrary  to  the  prognostications  of  certain  prophets  who  had  antici- 
pated all  kinds  of  disaster  for  the  government  and  for  the  country  by 
the  establishment  of  the  Assembly,  which  they  considered  premature,  the 
normal  progress  of  the  government  continued,  relations  between  the  Com- 
mission and  the  Assembly,  on  one  side,  and  these  two  chambers  and  the 
executive,  on  the  other,  were  harmonious,  and  the  public  business  obtained 
prompt  and  appropriate  consideration.  This  was  due  mainly  to  the  full 
comprehension  by  the  Filipinos  of  their  public  responsibility  and  the  role 
which  they  were  to  play  in  the  government  of  their  country;  but  a great 
contributory  factor  toward  this  satisfactory  result  during  the  period  of  the 
Assembly  was  the  circumstance  that  there  were  placed  at  the  head  of  the 
government  able  men  with  open  minds  and  liberal  sentiments,  men,  in 
short,  who  immediately  comprehended  that  their  duty  was  to  aid  the 
Assembly  in  order  that  the  latter  could  function  freely,  with  dispatch, 
with  all  the  attributes  and  responsibilities  of  a coordinate  branch  of  the 
Legislature.  It  would  have  been  easy  for  them  and  for  the  Commission 
to  place  difficulties  in  the  way  of  the  Assembly.  A rupture  with  the  latter 
would  not  have  obstructed  the  routine  functioning  of  the  government. 
But  they  did  not  do  so.  The  disagreements  that  occurred  over  appropri- 
ations and  other  matters  did  not  break  the  amicable  relations  which  ex- 
isted between  the  two  chambers. 

Responding  to  this  course  of  action,  the  Assembly  cooperated  as  far  as 
possible  with  the  Commission  and  the  Governor  General,  and  was  an  effi- 
cient instrument  in  the  development  of  self-government  in  the  Philippines 
and  the  adoption  of  progressive  legislation.  The  first  law  enacted  was  an 
appropriation  of  PI, 000, 000  for  the  construction  of  rural  primary  school 
buildings — a measure  which  effectively  silenced  those  who  had  prophesied 
destructive  policies  on  the  part  of  the  Assembly. 


* Message  of  Governor  General  James  F.  Smith  to  the  Assembly. 
2 Message  of  President  Roosevelt  to  Congress,  1908. 


9 


The  first  allotments  of  funds  for  inter-provincial  roads  were  made, 
thereby  establishing  what  is  popularly  termed  the  “Politica  de  Carreteras” 
(good  roads  policy).  Our  first  state  university  of  the  American  type  was 
established.  And,  unfolding  a comprehensive  plan  of  progressive  legis- 
lation, there  was  undertaken  the  reform  of  old  and  enactment  of  new  laws 
of  economic,  social,  or  administrative  character,  such  as  those  referring  to 
municipal  or  provincial  governments,  sanitation,  public  order,  normal  and 
higher  schools,  land  registration,  production,  economics  and  finance,  and 
relating  to  conciliation  of  capital  and  labor. 

The  success  of  the  Assembly  justified  in  the  eyes  of  the  American  Gov- 
ernment the  next  step  forward  made  by  President  Wilson1  in  1913  in  giv- 
ing the  Filipinos  control  of  the  Commission,  by  which  was  realized  the 
plan  of  P’ilipinization  announced  previously  by  President  McKinley  and 
later  confirmed  by  President  Roosevelt,  when  he  spoke  of  transforming 
the  Philippine  Government  as  soon  as  possible  from  a government  of 
Americans  aided  by  P'ilipinos  to  a government  of  Filipinos  aided  by  Amer- 
icans. With  a native  majority  in  both  houses  of  the  Legislature,  political 
control  of  the  government  passed  into  the  hands  of  the  Filipino  people.  It 
is  true  that  there  was  still  the  Governor  General,  an  official  appointed  by 
the  United  States,  who  exercised  control  over  the  executive  departments, 
but  the  power  to  chart  the  policy  of  the  government  which  belonged  to 
the  Legislature  had  been  taken  out  of  the  hands  of  the  Chief  Executive. 
And  not  being  elected  by  the  people  and  not  being  the  head  of  the  party 
which  haiTcontrol  of  the  Legislature,  his  position  was  so  delicate  that  he 
could  hope  to  succeed  only  by  gaining  the  confidence  and  obtaining  the 
counsel  of  the  leaders  of  the  people. 

The  man  who  in  that  stage  of  constitutional  development  of  the  Philip- 
pines was  at  the  head  of  the  executive  department  understood  that  the 
duty  of  cooperating  with  the  Filipinos  in  the  management  of  their  govern- 
ment was  more  imperative  than  before.  This  duty  was  performed.  The 
new  concession  was  an  important  step  by  which  the  sense  of  responsibility 
and  political  preparation  of  the  P'ilipinos  were  again  put  to  the  test.  Presi- 
dent Wilson  took  this  step  because  he  had  faith  in  the  capacity  of  the 
Filipino  people.  And,  anticipating  the  success  of  the  measure,  he  an- 
nounced that  other  steps  would  be  taken  “with  a view  to  the  ultimate 
independence  of  the  islands  and  as  a preparation  for  that  independence.” 

As  in  the  past,  prophets  of  disaster  arose  and  predicted  days  of  gloom. 
Thus,  again,  a measure  was  characterized  as  premature.  But  the  entire 
administration,  as  one  man,  faced  the  situation  with  courage  and  the 
Filipinos  again  emerged  triumphant  in  the  experiment.  Constructive  laws 
were  approved  without  a single  instance  of  disapproval  by  the  Congress 

1 This  step  was  formally  announced  in  his  message  to  the  Filipino  people,  which  reads 

as  follows : 

“We  regard  ourselves  as  trustees  acting  not  for  the  advantage  of  the  United  States 
but  for  the  benefit  of  the  people  of  the  Philippine  Islands. 

“Every  step  we  take  will  be  taken  with  a view  to  the  ultimate  independence  of  the 
islands  and  as  a preparation  for  that  independence.  And  we  hope  to  move  toward  that  end  as 
rapidly  as  the  saiety  and  the  permanent  interests  of  the  islands  will  permit.  After  each 
step  taken  experience  will  guide  us  to  the  next. 

“The  administration  will  take  one  step  at  once  and  will  give  to  the  native  citizens  ot 
the  islands  a majority  in  the  appointive  commission,  and  thus  in  the  upper  as  well  as  In 
the  lower  house  of  the  legislature  a majority  representation  will  be  secured  to  them. 

"We  do  this  in  the  confident  hope  and  expectation  that  immediate  proof  will  be  given 
in  the  action  of  the  commission  under  the  new  arrangement  of  the  political  capacity  of 
those  native  citizens  who  have  already  come  forward  to  represent  and  to  lead  their  people 
in  affairs." 


10 


of  the  United  States.  The  most  complete  harmony  characterized  the  re- 
lations between  the  Executive  and  the  Legislature.  The  positions  left  by 
the  Americans  who  retired  from  the  service  were  given  to  Filipinos,  follow- 
ing in  this  way  the  process  of  Filipinization  announced  16  years  previously 
by  President  McKinley  and  adhered  to  by  his  successors.  Mindanao,  our 
great  island  to  the  south,  which  has  always  been  under  military  rule,  was 
transferred  to  the  jurisdiction  of  the  civil  authorities  and  never,  as  during 
that  regime,  was  the  reign  of  peace  more  complete  or  were  the  relations 
between  Christian  and  non-Christian  Filipinos  more  cordial.  The  Philippine 
Legislature  during  that  period  voted  1,000,000  pesos  for  the  expansion  of 
the  schools  in  Mindanao  and  other  places  inhabited  by  non-Christians.1 

The  success  of  the  plan  of  an  elective  assembly  and  a Filipino  majority 
in  the  appointive  commission  prepared  the  way  for  new  advances  in  the 
field  of  self-government.  In  1916  Congress  approved  an  act  commonly 
known  by  the  name  of  its  author,  Representative  Jones,  of  Virginia.  This 
law  contains  two  essential  points — an  explicit  promise  of  independence 
and  the  concession  of  autonomy  in  domestic  affairs  as  a logical  step  toward 
fulfillment  of  that  promise.  The  pledge  of  absolute  independence,  as  it 
appears  in  the  preamble  of  the  law,  was  a compromise  between  the  radicals 
in  Congress  who  desired  immediate  independence  (the  Clarke  amendment) 
and  the  conservatives  who  were  not  in  favor  of  a specific  promise  of  in- 
dependence. But  if  during  the  discussion  of  the  law  opposition  was  reg- 
istered against  the  promise  of  independence,  that  was  not  the  case  with 
regard  to  the  matter  of  granting  internal  autonomy  to  the  Filipinos. 
Democrats  as  well  as  Republicans  thenceforth  found  complete  justification 
for  the  step  which  gave  to  the  Filipinos  control  of  their  internal  affairs, 
thus  giving  in  this  manner  the  greatest  emphasis  to  the  policy  announced 
by  President  McKinley  from  the  very  beginning. 

Autonomy  was  secured  by  conceding  to  the  Filipinos  an  elective  leg- 
islature vested  with  general  and  broader  legislative  powers.  If  the  two 
organic  laws  for  the  Philippines  approved  by  Congress  on  July  1,  1902, 
and  August  29,  1916,  are  compared,  it  will  be  seen  that  the  new  legisla- 
ture, wholly  Filipino,  enjoys  powers  which  the  preceding  legislature  com- 
posed of  the  commission  and  the  assembly  did  not  have.  The  most  im- 
portant of  these  new  powers  is  the  authority  to  organize  executive  de- 
partments. Under  this  authority  the  Philippine  Legislature  may  make 
or  unmake  the  executive  departments,  change  their  designations,  prescribe 
the  powers  and  duties  of  each,  and  determine  the  pi-ocess  of  appointment 
and  removal  of  department  heads  by  the  Governor  General. 

The  most  serious  difficulty  encountered  by  the  Filipinos  in  the  reor- 
ganization of  the  executive  departments  under  the  new  law  was  how  to 
secure  the  unity  of  action  necessary  for  the  efficiency  and  stability  of  the 
new  government.  When  there  was  only  one  representative  body,  the  as- 
sembly, its  speaker  was  spontaneously  recognized  as  the  leader  of  the 
Filipinos  in  the  government  and  the  authorized  interpreter  of  popular 
aspirations.  Mow  that  instead  of  one  there  were  three  agencies  which 
represented  the  people,  the  senate,  the  house  of  repi-esentatives,  and  the 
cabinet,  the  great  need  was  the  coordination  of  these  instrumentalities  so 
that  the  unity  of  action  so  essential  in  a government  could  be  possible. 


'Special  Report,  December  1,  1915,  of  Brig.  Gen.  Frank  McIntyre,  Chief,  Bureau  of 
In3ulnr  Affairs, 


11 


In  the  conferences  held  by  the  majority  party  of  the  legislature  various 
propositions  were  discussed.  Some  declared  frankly  in  favor  of  a parlia- 
mentary system,  while  others  desired  strict  application  of  the  presidential 
type  of  government.  It  was  discovered,  after  some  discussion,  that  neither 
the  one  form  nor  the  other  ought  to  be  followed.  The  objection  to  the 
parliamentary  form  lay  in  the  fact  that  in  those  States  where  the  system 
operates  most  successfully  the  executive  possesses  the  power  to  dissolve 
the  legislature,  and  this  authority  was  not  given  by  law  to  the  Governor 
General.  The  members  of  the  legislature  under  the  Jones  Act  held  office 
for  a fixed  term.  Without  the  counterbalancing  power  of  appealing  to  the 
people  through  dissolution  of  the  legislature,  the  right  to  cause  changes  in 
the  cabinet  through  an  adverse  legislative  vote  would  be  exercised  in  a 
reckless  and  irresponsible  manner.  On  the  other  hand,  if  the  rigid  presi- 
dential type  were  applied  with  its  complete  separation  of  powers,  the 
Philippine  legislature  being  elected  by  the  Filipino  people  and  the  chief 
executive  appointed  by  the  President  of  the  United  States,  conflicts  be- 
tween those  two  powers  would  be  probable  and  effective  government 
wanting. 

The  very  fact  that  the  office  of  Governor  General  is  not  elective 
is  in  itself  an  argument  against  the  application  of  the  presidential  system 
in  the  Philippines.  In  that  system,  the  Chief  Executive  being  chosen  by 
the  nation  and  being  the  leader  of  the  party  with  a majority  in  the  legis- 
lature, is  responsible,  together  with  his  party,  for  administration  as  well 
as  legislation.  His  position  within  the  party  and  in  the  country  enables 
him  to  coordinate  the  powers  of  government  and  make  them  move  together 
in  harmony.  A separation  of  powers  therefore  is  more  nominal  than  real. 
In  practice  there  is  less  of  separation  and  more  of  real  unity  of  action 
resulting  from  a common  responsibility  to  the  people. 

In  the  Philippines,  this  separation  would  have  been  complete  and  ef- 
fective and,  as  there  would  be  no  way  of  holding  the  two  powers  to  a 
common  responsibility,  disagreements  would  hamper  the  efficient  conduct 
of  government.  In  that  case  its  organs  might  have  functioned  mechani- 
cally. But,  lacking  the  unity  of  spirit  which  is  the  secret  of  a good  con- 
stitutional system,  the  prompt  adoption  of  measures  required  by  the  public 
welfare  would  not  have  been  assured.  Not  only  would  the  progress  of 
the  government  have  been  paralyzed,  but  also  the  constant  friction  would 
have  produced  the  impression  of  a lack  of  stability,  a situation  which 
would  have  been  fatal  under  the  Jones  law  and  which  is  unfortunately 
the  experience  of  other  countries  in  which  the  executive  and  legislative 
departments  were  completely  separated.  So  it  was  with  revolutionary 
France  where  a series  of  constitutions  based  on  Montesquieu’s  separation 
of  powers  successively  failed.  Constitutional  stability  was  not  attained 
until  the  necessary  connection  between  the  powers  of  government  was 
provided  for  in  the  constitution  of  1875.  A similar  adjustment  is  now  a 
common  feature  of  European  constitutions-.  Again,  in  the  Latin  Amer- 
ican republics  conditions  of  instability  were  acute  so  long  as  the  executive 
and  legislative  departments  were  kept  separate.  No  improvement  was 
noted  until  provision  had  been  made  for  the  necessary  connection  between 
these  two  powers.1 

The  formula  conceived  by  those  responsible  for  the  new  organization 


1 H.  J.  Ford,  “Representative  Government.” 


12 


of  the  executive  departments  was  one  which,  without  being  incompatible 
with  the  provisions  of  the  Jones  law,  differed  in  some  respects  from  the 
presidential  form.  In  the  first  place  it  was  decided,  in  order  that  the 
currents  of  public  opinion  as  far  as  possible  may  be  felt  in  the  Cabinet, 
that  the  department  secretaries  should  be  appointed,  not  simultaneously 
with  the  appointment  of  the  Governor  General  by  the  President  of  the 
United  States  but  after  the  organization  of  each  legislature.  The  depart- 
ment secretaries  are  to  hold  office  not  indefinitely,  but  during  the  term  of 
the  Legislature  at  the  opening  of  which  they  were  appointed.  The  secre- 
taries are  given  complete  responsibility  in  the  administration  of  their 
departments,  subject  to  the  supervision  of  the  Governor  General.  Instead 
of  keeping  them  distant  from  the  Legislature  under  the  specious  pretext 
that  thus  would  the  independence  of  the  Legislature  be  better  preserved, 
it  is  provided  that  they  may  appear  before  either  house  to  be  heard  on 
matters  affecting  their  departments  and  that  each  chamber  may  also 
request  them  to  appear  to  give  information  regarding  those  matters.  They 
are  united  with  the  leaders  of  the  Legislature  in  one  body,  the  council  of 
state,  presided  over  by  the  Governor  General,  in  order  that  instead  of 
dispersion  and  antagonism  there  may  be  harmony  in  the  government,  that 
at  all  times  a collective  and  responsible  counsel  emanating  from  the  people 
may  be  available,  and  that  the  government  may  move  with  all  efficiency. 

In  the  widest  development  of  this  system  the  leaders  of  the  Legislature  * 

would  sit  with  the  Governor  General  as  members  of  his  cabinet.  There  is 
nothing  in  the  Jones  law  which  prohibits  this  step;  it  would  be  in  accord 
with  constitutional  precedents  in  the  Philippines.  It  would  secure  the 
closest  harmony  between  the  Executive  and  Legislature,  and  it  would  give 
to  the  initiative  and  recommendations  of  the  former  in  matters  of  legis- 
lation the  weight  which  they  would  necessarily  lack  if  the  Executive  were 
to  be  kept  apart  from  the  representatives  of  the  people.  In  such  case  it 
might  then  be  desirable  to  consider  a readjustment  of  the  present  system, 
so  that  the  presiding  officers  of  the  two  chambers  would  no  longer  be 
political  leaders  but  merely  judicial  officers  charged  with  guiding  the  de- 
bates according  to  legislative  rules. 

The  working  of  this  system  of  government  as  outlined  above  was 
highly  satisfactory.  During  the  period  in  which  that  system  worked  in 
its  entirety  the  administration  was  normal,  democratic,  and  effective. 

The  constitutional  relations  between  the  Executive  and  the  Legislature, 
which  constitute  the  touchstone  of  all  representative  government,  but 
especially  so  in  the  Philippines,  being  based  on  mutual  understanding,  re- 
mained normal  and  harmonious.  The  recommendations  or  suggestions  of 
one  were  received  by  the  other  in  a spirit  of  frank  cooperation.  The 
executive  understood  the  true  role  and  the  responsibility  of  the  Legisla- 
ture and  vice  versa.  He  did  not  surrender  his  constitutional  powers  to 
the  legislature,  but  neither  did  he  invade  those  of  the  latter.  Both  viewed 
all  matters  submitted  to  their  consideration  exclusively  from  the  point  of 
view  of  the  welfare  of  the  Filipino  people.  Consequently  the  government 
as  a whole  could  conceive,  formulate,  and  realize  constructive  programs 
needed  under  the  circumstances  in  the  social  order  as  well  as  in  the 
economic  and  the  administrative.  There  was  established  for  the  first 
time  a budgetary  system  by  which  was  assured  the  formulation  of  an 
annual  fiscal  policy  based  on  a scientific  examination  of  the  income  and 


IS 


expenditures  of  the  government.  This  is  not  the  occasion  to  speak  even 
in  summary  fashion  of  the  extensive  legislative  labor  covering  all  kinds 
of  activities,  from  the  allotment  of  30,000,000  pesos  for  a vast  program 
of  educational  extension  to  the  concession  to  the  provinces  and  munici- 
palities of  the  authority  necessary  to  issue  bonds  for  public  works;  from 
the  organization  and  financing  of  national  companies  for  the  development 
of  our  undeveloped  natural  resources  to  the  creation  of  the  bureau  of 
commerce  and  industry  for  the  purpose  of  fostering  domestic  and  foreign 
commerce;  from  the  establishment  of  the  office  of  public  welfare  with  all 
its  new  activities,  especially  for  the  reduction  of  infant  mortality,  to  the 
adoption  of  measures  leading  toward  the  increase  of  our  food  production; 
and  from  the  creation  of  the  Philippine  militia  as  a means  of  national  de- 
fense to  the  transformation  of  the  government  of  the  Province  of  Mindanao 
with  a view  to  making  them  a part  of  the  general  administrative  system 
of  the  Archipelago. 

But  where  the  spirit  of  cohesion  and  unity  of  that  government  and  the 
fact  of  its  being  in  complete  harmony  with  the  wishes  of  the  people  can 
best  be  seen  is  in  those  measures  taken  on  the  entrance  of  the  United 
States  into  the  World  War,  and  in  the  attitude  of  the  Filipinos  toward 
the  American  people  in  those  difficult  circumstances.  The  Filipinos  not 
only  responded  liberally  to  every  call  for  financial  or  humanitarian  aid 
made  by  the  American  Government  but  they  also  voluntarily  offered  men 
and  materials  of  war.  The  Philippine  Government  assumed  the  responsi- 
bility of  maintaining  public  order  throughout  its  territory,  and  the  United 
States  was  thus  enabled  to  withdraw  her  troops  from  the  Philippines  so 
that  they  may  be  sent  to  the  theater  of  war.  Her  flag  was  kept  flying  in 
the  Philippines  under  the  safeguard  of  the  affection  of  12,000,000  Filipinos. 
The  latter  went  further.  Through  a supreme  impulse  of  loyalty  they 
ceased  to  mention  the  word  “independence”  throughout  the  duration  of 
the  war,  confident  as  they  were  that  the  entrance  of  the  United  States 
into  the  conflict  meant  the  victory  of  liberty  and  democracy  in  all  parts 
of  the  world.1 

It  is  interesting  to  examine  the  position  of  the  Governor  General  in 
our  government  under  the  Jones  law.  He  has  ceased  to  be  the  chief 
executive  of  the  military  regime  in  whom  were  vested  or  from  whom 
emanated  all  the  powers  of  government.  No  longer  is  he  the  chief  ex- 
ecutive of  the  days  of  the  Commission  when,  besides  being  Governor 
General,  he  presided  over  the  upper  house  with  a controlling  majority 
in  that  body.  Neither  is  he  the  Governor  General  of  the  latter  and  more 
liberal  era  (1913-1916)  in  which,  without  having  a majority  in  the  Com- 
mission, he  continued  nevertheless  to  be  a member  of  it  and  occupied  no 
less  a position  than  president.  The  Chief  Executive  no  longer  presides 
over  the  upper  house.  He  has  the  veto  power,  but  two-thirds  of  the  vote 
of  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives  may  override  it  and  place 
the  vetoed  measure  in  the  hands  of  the  President  of  the  United  States. 
He  exercises  supervision  and  control  over  the  executive  departments,  but 
can  not  appoint  anybody  he  pleases  to  positions  in  those  departments 
without  following  the  requirements  of  the  law  and  obtaining  the  advice 
and  consent  of  the  Senate. 

If  we  examine  the  nature  of  the  office  in  the  light  of  these  constitu- 


’ Reply  of  Secretary  of  War  Baker  to  the  Philippine  Parliamentary  Mission,  April,  1919. 


14 


tional  precepts  and  the  evolution  effected  by  those  democratic  ideas,  -which 
have  been  the  soul  of  the  political  institutions  established  by  the  Americans 
in  the  Philippines,  we  can  not  escape  the  conclusion  that  the  Governor 
General  no  longer  has  the  responsibilities  which  he  previously  had.  The 
power  of  administrative  supervision  and  of  veto  has  been  given  to  him 
to  safeguard  the  rights  of  sovereignty  and  the  international  ‘obligations 
assumed  by  the  United  States.  But  if  they  be  well  understood,  these 
powers  have  more  of  a negative  than  positive  character.  It  is  not  expected 
of  him  that  he  should  frame  the  policy  of  the  whole  government,  because 
that  task  is  assigned  to  the  legislature,,  and  he  is  excluded  from  member- 
ship in  the  legislative  body.  His  role  is  that  of  a man  of  lofty  character 
with  great  moral  prestige,  beyond  the  reach  of  local  partisanship,  placed 
by  the  government  of  his  country  to  guard  impartially  the  integrity  of 
the  representative  regime  already  established,  and  to  see  that  the  law 
promulgated  by  the  representatives  of  the  people  is  faithfully  executed. 
In  acting  thus,  he  will  be  a salutary  influence,  capable  of  bringing  together 
the  different  parts  of  the  government  and  promoting  efficient  and  wise 
administration. 

The  position  of  the  Governor  General  has  not  changed  in  the  least  the 
authority,  the  responsibility,  and  the  essence  of  American  sovereignty 
in  the  Philippines.  That  sovereignty  exists  as  fully  as  before.  The  leg- 
islature can  not  enact  laws  in  conflict  with  the  Jones  law  because  the 
courts  will  declare  them  unconstitutional.  Every  bill  or  joint  resolution, 
to  take  effect,  must  be  approved  by  the  Governor  General.  The  law  even 
after  approval  by  the  Governor  General  may  yet  be  annulled  by  the  Amer- 
ican Congress.  It  is  clear,  then,  that  the  rights  of  sovereignty  have  re- 
mained intact.  What  has  happened  is  an  increase  in  the  local  power  given 
to  the  Filipino  people  and  a corresponding  decrease,  naturally,  in  the 
powers  of  the  local  representative  of  the  American  Government.  The  aim 
of  the  present  organic  law  is  to  grant  us  autonomy,  while  that  of  the 
former  one  was  to  prepare  us  for  autonomy. 

The  Jones  law  can  not  be  correctly  interpreted  in  any  way  other  than 
that  already  indicated.  That  is  the  interpretation  contained  in  its  letter 
and  spirit.  The  theory  of  keeping  the  Governor  General  of  the  Philip- 
pines completely  apart  from  the  representatives  of  the  people,  besides 
being  undemocratic,  will  make  impossible  the  normal  business  of  ad- 
ministration and  will  create  a chaos  without  precedent  in  our  history.  Un- 
der such  theory  the  Governor  General  would  be  isolated  and,  in  his  isola- 
tion, would  find  himself  tempted  to  antagonize  the  representatives  of  the 
people  and  make  undue  use  of  the  veto  power.  If  he  finds  it  impossible 
not  to  approve  bills  passed  by  the  legislature,  he  may  impose  conditions 
regarding  the  enforcement  of  such  measures  and  thus,  without  vetoing, 
he  would  be  in  a position  to  nullify  the  intent  of  the  legislature;  he  may 
go  above  the  laws  if  their  enforcement  limits  the  exercise  of  what  is 
assumed  to  be  unrestrained  executive  authority;  he  may  disregard  public 
opinion  in  the  matter  of  appointments  and  the  opinion  of  the  heads  of 
departments  in  administrative  affairs;  and  he  may  surround  himself  with 
men  who  do  not  enjoy  popular  confidence  but  are  willing  to  give  him 
that  support  which  he  would  not  obtain  from  the  legislature  from  which 
he  had  isolated  himself.  And  if  on  top  of  this  the  Legislature  also  insisted 
upon  its  constitutional  authority,  as  is  its  right,  not  surrendering  to  the 


15 


claims  of  the  executive,  we  shall  have  the  normal  process  of  government 
broken  and  the  progress  of  public  business  halted. 

Another  theory,  even  more  illogical  and  more  violative  of  the  spirit 
and  letter  of  the  Jones  law,  is  that  which  would  make  the  Governor  Gen- 
eral the  nerve  center  of  the  whole  government,  the  dictator  of  its  policy, 
and  the  sole  leader  of  the  nation.  Then  we  would  fare  even  worse  than 
in  the  first  days  of  military  occupation.  Our  legislative  chambers  would 
be  converted  into  mere  debating  societies.  To  speak  of  representative 
government  then  would  be  irony.  There  would  be  instituted  a completely 
irresponsible  government,  because  it  would  neither  be  responsible  to  the 
Filipino  people,  who  would  have  no  voice  in  the  election  of  a chief  executive, 
nor  to  the  American  Government  and  the  American  people  because  of  the 
distance  separating  the  Philippines  from  the  United  States.  And,  finally, 
we  would  make  of  that  archipelago,  inhabited  by  12,000,000  souls,  a mere 
colonial  appendage  of  this  country. 

I am  certain  the  American  people  will  not  look  with  approval  upon  such 
a situation.  It  is  not  based  on  the  accepted  political  doctrines  of  this 
country.  It  is  incompatible  with  America’s  policy  in  the  Philippines  and 
the  most  modern  currents  of  opinion  in  the  development  of  new  de- 
mocracies. Our  constitutional  legislation  is  the  result  of  a gradual  and 
progressive  development  of  self-government,  a process  which  the  Filipinos 
were  required  to  go  through  from  the  very  first  days  of  American  occupa- 
tion. Every  increase  in  the  political  power  of  the  Filipino  people  was 
given  in  good  faith  and  good  will.  For  more  than  a quarter  of  a century 
the  Filipinos  have  been  receiving  the  benefits  of  such  a costly  experiment, 
which  they  accepted  not  because  they  doubted  their  own  political  canacity 
but  because  they  believed  that  it  was  a path  that  would  also  lead  to  liberty. 
Every  concession  was  the  logical  result  of  a preceding  one,  and  this  chain 
of  events  and  concessions  has  the  indestructible  strength  of  acquired  rights. 
Thus  it  was  that  when,  within  recent  years,  suggestions  for  a reactionary 
policy  in  the  Philipuines  were  heard,  President  Harding,  guarding  the 
liberal  tradition  established  without  any  interruption  by  his  predecessors, 
came  forward  and  declared  in  a categorical  manner  that  “no  backward  step 
is  contemplated,  no  diminution  of  your  domestic  control  is  to  be  sought.”1 

The  idea  of  self-determination  which  at  bottom  is  the  basis  of  Amer- 
ican policy  in  the  Philippines  has  made  much  progress  in  the  world  in 
recent  years.  Great  powers  which  yesterday  exercised  complete  dominion 
over  other  countries  and  races  are  today  loosening  the  ties  of  dependence 
for  the  benefit  of  weak  nations.  An  irresistible  wave  is  again  pushing 
humanity  toward  the  formation  of  new  nations  in  present-day  history. 
The  British  Empire  has  terminated  its  protectorate  over  Afghanistan;  has 
recognized  the  independence  of  Egypt  and  Mesopotamia,  subject  to  certain 
restrictions.  It  has  granted  self-government  to  Ireland  and  a responsible 
government  to  southern  Rhodesia;  it  has  also  established  a semi-resnonsible 
government  in  India  and  Malta;  and  it  has  promulgated  new  constitutions 
for  Ceylon,  Burma,  and  Nigeria.  The  French  Government  has  established 
parliaments  in  Tunis  and  Senegal.  Italy  has  given  parliaments  to  Tripoli 
and  Cyrenaica.1  All  these  events  have  occurred  since  the  approval  of  the 
Jones  law  for  the  Philippines.  The  example  of  the  United  States,  adminis- 


1 Address  of  the  President  to  the  Philippine  Mission,  1922. 
’See  Buell,  Atlantic  Monthly,  March.  1924. 


16 


tering  the  Philippine  Islands  in  trusteeship  and  preparing  its  inhabitants 
for  self-governmtnt  and  absolute  sovereignty,  is  a brilliant  page  in  con- 
temporary history.  But  that  example  is  no  longer  unique.1  The  govern- 
mental concessions  contained  in  the  Jones  law  may  have  been  appropriate 
at  the  time  of  its  enactment,  but  a thorough  study  of  the  system  in  rela- 
tion to  the  unparalleled  progress  of  the  Filipino  people  and  the  advance 
of  democratic  ideas  the  world  over  will  perhaps  find  it  no  longer  adequate. 
The  time  to  advance  has  come.  Fortunately,  the  next  step  forward  is 
plainly  indicated  by  the  present  law — a step  which,  when  taken,  will  be 
the  crowning  achievement  in  a great  joint  enterprise  carried  to  a success- 
ful conclusion  by  the  good  will  of  two  friendly  peoples. 


1 Dutcher.  "The  Political  Awakeninsr  of  the  Eaet.*' 


